linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <44F335C8.7020108@zytor.com>
Date:	Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:28:24 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Alon Bar-Lev <alon.barlev@...il.com>
CC:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, johninsd@....rr.com,
	Matt_Domsch@...l.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit
 (ping)

Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> On 8/28/06, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
>> Totally pointless since we're in 16-bit mode (as is the "incl %esi")...
>> I guess it's "better" in the sense that if we run out of that we'll
>> crash due to a segment overrun... maybe (some BIOSes leave us
>> unknowningly in big real mode...)
> 
> So leave as is? Loading address into esi and reference as si?
> Or modify the whole code to use 16 bits?
> 

Probably modifying the whole code to use 16 bits, unless there is a 
specific reason not to (Matt?)

	-hpa

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/